Name for name: Carl Froch resume vs Joe Calzaghe resume

Think its forgotten how Calzaghe had a damaged hand and had, had a bad build up with all that was going on, but I guess if you are commenting you must be aware?
Also why would Froch not have respect for Joes power? When his hands were not at their worst his power was respectful

 

It doesn't matter how many people favoured Roy, as Joe himself didn't see him as much of a threat. We know that when he said the following:

"A fight with me and Roy is now pointless as he's no longer the same fighter"


On speaking about a potential Tarver fight:

"I don't rate Tarver. He only beat Roy because he was shot, and Johnson did the same"


Regarding Kelly Pavlik, he was an unknown NABF champion in 2006.

 

What makes you think that Joe would have fought Dawson had he not retired?

 

We have gone through this before in that it was an era fight like Lewis/Tyson. They had been around together and didnt fight until late in their careers. Calzaghe may have not seen Roy as a threat but certainly many others did

 

I think it would have been a fight where it would have become a no brainer.
What SMW did Calzaghe refuse to fight at SMW when he was there? None. It was Dawson who decided to go to LHW not stay at SMW where Calzaghe was and take fights with older fighters for a time. Also even if you say its down to levels, Dawson had been badly troubled by Johnson who had lost to Sheika when prime who Calzaghe handled

 

Man, forgot it BHop didn't get Dawson till then, that's a fair point. Fact is though that he went after a shot Jones instead of other more worthy opponents. He could've finished his career better. He was happy for most of his career feasting on overmatched, mediocre fighters until he was pushed into the Lacy fight. I mean just look at his record. He wasted years of his career. JC versus Dawson would have been a good fight. Throw in Tarver and Johnson and he would have finished his career in style. Not an all time great IMO.

 

Lol, are you on his payroll or something? Froch walked through flush shots from harder hitters. Joe's lack of power was a turn off to some back then. Oh, we know all about his damaged hands. Doesn't change anything. Workrate was JC's killer attribute. He was a real workhorse. I have no doubt that a mid 30's Bhop would have out hustled him and a prime 168 Jones would have worked him over. Joe is a real hof'er but falls short of atg. I'm sure he appreciates all your tireless work though man. I don't think I'm devoted enough to any fighter to give as much of a fcuk as you do though. I do have Joe in my top 10 UK fighters though but have Lewis, Wilde and Buchanan above him off the top of my head.

 

Fair play to you Orca. There are many posters who make comments and when challenged dont admit otherwise. You have my respect (not that, that would mean anything to you) for that.

He had just beaten the champ and many favoured Jones to beat him and I think it was a bit of an era fight where they were both around at similar times and had been associated before. Jones was the #6 LHW at that time and above him wasnt really bigger selling names

???
46-0
Winner of 24 world title fights
WBO, WBC, WBA, IBF SMW titles as well as considered lineal champ at SMW and LHW

Before the Lacy fight there was Eubank, Woodhall, Mitchell, Reid, Veit, Brewer all were world rated had been, were/became SMW title holders and had beaten other world class SMWs and his career didnt stop with Lacy so I dont take much from what you say with that

Yes If Calzaghe didnt retire (and he had said all along he was going to before Dawson became a real top name) I think Dawson would have been a decent match up on paper as Dawson was undefeated, though I think Calzaghe would have won widely, but Calzaghe retired. As for Tarver, well Calzaghe had just beaten the fighter who schooled him and Johnson you forget was a fighter who had lost to Sheika who Calzaghe beat. I dont think Johnson would have been for top money for Calzaghe (not that I would know)

 

Joes power was decent when his hands werent terrible and I think Froch would have respected it as Calzaghe would likely have been throwing more than anyone else and firing off more combos than anyone else. Even if its not the hardest one shot an accumulation takes its toll

 

We shuld be talking about notable WINS, not names.

Carl Froch Notable Wins:

1. Jean Pascal
2. Jermain Taylor
3. Andre Dirrell
4. Mikkel Kessler
5. Arthur Abraham
6. Glen Johnson
7. George Groves
8. Lucian Bute


Joe Calzaghe Notable Wins:

1. Chris Eubank
2. Robin Reid
3. Jeff Lacy
4. Sakio Bika
5. Charles Brewer
6. Mikkel Kessler
7. Bernard Hopkins
8. Roy Jones Jr.

I don't see a big difference. A shot Glen Johnson is equivalent to a shot Roy Jones, so we could just delete both of them.

Arthur Abraham and Charles Brewer were both paper-title holders who were exposed as soon as they fought top-level opposition, so we could delete them as well.

Andre Dirrell and Jeff Lacy had zero wins against prime A-level opposition, so they have no business being on the lists.

The actual lists of notable wins should be 5 guys each:

Carl Froch Notable Wins:

Jean Pascal
Jermain Taylor
Mikkel Kessler
George Groves
Lucian Bute


Joe Calzaghe Notable Wins:

Chris Eubank
Robin Reid
Sakio Bika
Mikkel Kessler
Bernard Hopkins

 

B Mitchell who Calzaghe beat was a top SMW who beat Liles. Woodhall was also a top SMW and I would rate either above Bika.
There is alot more I could add where I would disagree with you a fair bit. Groves was a British champ at the time Froch fought him and similar in level to Starie when Calzaghe beat him

 

Carl Froch is the man who did what matters. Fight the best at their best. And give it all you have and never back down.

At the end of the day if you can't do that you don't deserve the same adulation of those that do.

 

So who do you feel Calzaghe chose not to fight at SMW?
In fact what is Frochs best SMW victory in your opinion.

 

So what if a few people thought that Roy would win?

Again, Joe didn't see him as a threat, which is why he was happy to fight him over the likes of Pavlik and Dawson.

 

Joe struggled to make weight to remain at SMW, when he could have tried to have pursued better fighters at LHW.

We know from his comments that he didn't really rate the likes of Tarver or Johnson.

You say it would have been a no brainer that Joe would have fought Dawson had he not retired. But where's the logic? He said that he wasn't interested in Dawson, as he'd done nothing to warrant a fight. So even if he'd have remained active for another few years, I don't really see how he'd have changed his opinion.

Joe quite rightly gets criticised for the comments he's made throughout the years. If he didn't rate the likes of Tarver, Johnson, Pavlik and Dawson, that was his right. But you can't tell the fans that they don't excite you and they don't warrant a fight with you, yet then fight guys like Bika, Manfredo, and a faded Roy instead. Nobody's going to respect that.